[QUOTE=ynl063w;8271010]
So the “they” you were referring to, the ones who get to go in their merry way, are Steven Rivetts and Brigid Colvin. They are the ones who were suspended and fined, so I’m not understanding why you think they get to go on their merry way. Presumably they both signed as trainers. Based on the COTH article, Brigid Colvin is the appropriate person to sign as trainer for Parker’s horses. Since the article did not mention the other guy, I’m not clear on what his role is that he would have signed as trainer.
Your explanation of who “they” are doesn’t make any sense.[/QUOTE]
Oh I miss understood you. They would be the people actually training Tori. I’ve been to shows where she’s at, and her mother is not usually the only person with her. Just because Andre doesn’t sign the entry blanks, doesn’t mean he isn’t helping her. Same concept, trainers don’t sign for horses not in their care - too risky.
And Steven Rivetts DOES help train Betsee’s horses. He is 98% of the time listed as trainer for Betsee’s Hunters Tori does.
Yes, drug testing is random. However, if you have one horse and go to 12 rated shows a year you will probably get tested less then someone that has 20 horses going to 24 shows a year. It’s just more probable.
[QUOTE=vxf111;8270440]
I have been at shows where half the class falls off or refuses and a 65 full of bad distances on an eggbeater horse WAS the best trip. A 65 isn’t going to win the class at Devon-- but at a low level show?! Some days it seems like sh!t happens to everyone at the same time[/QUOTE]
At my A-circuit medal finals in 2013, I was riding in the first round for one of the medals. I was fairly competitive but there were some spectacular riders in our finals that year. The course was tough as hell and it was also monsooning, flooding everything and making visibility (nevermind stickability) tough. My horse got super backed off while pooping through a very long and low hay-bale 2 stride and added a stride, garnering us a 68. I was pretty dejected about making such a stupid mistake.
Alas, we got 9th overall out of countless trips. Course and weather were so tough that our 68 still got us a top 10 finish in the medal finals in tough company :lol::lol::lol: At one point we were still in the top 5 because everybody was stopping or falling off.
Since it was a riding for ribbons affair, the announcer came on the PA at one point during the wreckage and said, “IF YOU HAVE. NOT. FALLEN. OFF DURING YOUR TRIP…STAY HERE TO RIDE FOR A RIBBON.”
These things certainly do happen even at nice shows. :winkgrin:
Back to our regularly scheduled programming…to make this relevant, I had a green TB hunter at the same show who I schooled 2 mornings in a row and that I also cantered down for probably 20 minutes before his first class so that we could settle and focus and then win quite a bit! We’re proof that not every successful hunter drugs. :yes:
And FWIW at the lower levels of of dressage/unrated shows/nervous adult types you see PLENTY of quieting via drugging. PLENTY. No Edward Gal doesn’t need Ace to get around but at your local level PLENTY of nervous overhorsed ladies are riding horses who were given a cocktail.[/QUOTE]
I do not think this is true AT ALL. I showed dressage for 20 years and never once knew about any horse being “given a cocktail.” Seriously.
[QUOTE=busylady;8270692] Any chance we can refocus this thread? The issue here isn’t the difference between dressage and hunters, it is that one of the top horses, ridden by the winningest (is that a word??) juniors and owned by the top owner in the sport was medicated at one of the top events!!!
I’m curious how people feel about the players involved knowing what we know now. I’m also curious if people are talking about this with their barnmates and trainer. It seems like the topic is off limits and it also seems like the industry is okay with it. Drugging is part of the culture and if someone gets caught it is okay because we are all doing it. I’m frankly shocked that COTH did an article on it (great job COTH). What about the sponsors? Will they still support the owner/rider/trainer? Will we still see the rider on the cover of magazines (al la Scott Stewart after his set down)? Will you still be in awe when you see Tori lay down a 90, or 100, point round?[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. This is your thread and (well-chosen) focus. I’ll answer your question.
It makes me-- again-- want to find another discipline where I can hope to compete fairly if I pay my entry. What worries me is the arms race of spending-- and now drugging-- to the bottom. The problem is that these folks have access to the best training, riding and mind/body combo a horse can offer. They have the horse others, with less, are trying to beat. Yet the Tippy Tops want to hedge their bets (of do something else?) by adding a layer of pharmaceutical quietness to that?
If so, what does the poor schmuck who doesn’t have $750K/year and a horse with the same price tag do? I mean, what are the odds of that lesser guy winning when this is where the bar is?
If it costs that much to play— and I mean to be genuinely competitive if you paid for an entry fee that ostensibly gave you a shot-- and then you have to cheat as well? I thnk you’d be stupid to wade in.
From the Serio letter, one of their complaints is that they were not informed of the first positive test in a timely manner so that they could correct their “mistake.”
I see it from two angles.
An honest trainer could make an honest mistake with supplements (say), and can only correct the problem if told about it.
But, USEF has an interest in seeing if this is just one horse on one day or if it is a pattern. Multiple tests before disclosure are thus somewhat diagnostic.
I feel that some targeted testing along with the random testing is warranted - IE, winners of big events should be tested every time; judges should be able to refer specific entries for testing.
[QUOTE=inca;8271139]
I do not think this is true AT ALL. I showed dressage for 20 years and never once knew about any horse being “given a cocktail.” Seriously.[/QUOTE]
Ummmm…not seeing means nothing. There’s always been a few violations over in the sandbox. I actually noticed the PP tubes in the trash about 2 years back when I spectated at a Dressage show and witnessed an Ammy rider asking her companion if Horsie had his vitamins. Friend I was there to watch said she sometimes hears somebody telling a rider having a rough warm up to have the groom take the horse back to the stall to pee…common codes for a little chemical help.
[QUOTE=Tackpud;8271004]
However, what do you do with the horse that has been sold between the time it was tested and the time the test results come back and it goes to the hearing committee? Obviously the testing system is slow - you don’t get the results back within a day - and the new owner could be stuck with a horse that can’t show even when they had nothing to do with the violation. Is that fair? Absolutely not. Do you start selling horses with the caveat they have not been tested in the last X days? While I agree with the idea of setting the horse down in theory, in reality it’s not at all practical.[/QUOTE]
You raise some great points. The timeliness of drug testing results creates a problem. Still, I would rather address those issues and retain a penalty that makes sense than craft a penalty that truly accomplishes little – there is always going to be a different trainer/rider who can continue to show the horse. Without spending much time thinking about this problem, it would be possible to have the new owner produce a pre-purchase blood test showing a negative result for drugs (many many pre-purchase exams include drug tests) which would allow the new owner to continue to show the horse as a bona fide buyer without knowledge.
Rules crafted because they are enforceable and avoid potential problems - like the new pre-green rules which allow for experience at 3’6" and over in jumpers - tend to create other difficulties.
[QUOTE=inca;8271139]
I do not think this is true AT ALL. I showed dressage for 20 years and never once knew about any horse being “given a cocktail.” Seriously.[/QUOTE]
YMMV. I’ve watched horses get injections of Ace at a schooling dressage show. I’ve also seen trash bins full of Perfect Prep tubes (though I personally don’t think it’s terribly effective, other people seem to disagree). I’ve also seen older dressage horses given bute before showing. At a local/unrated show where there’s no testing-- you’ll see a wide variety of what people are willing to do.
[QUOTE=inca;8271139]
I do not think this is true AT ALL. I showed dressage for 20 years and never once knew about any horse being “given a cocktail.” Seriously.[/QUOTE]
Here’s what I think the difference is.
I have no doubt that some people drug dressage horses, or event horses, as a shortcut.
But, there’s not a culture that you MUST do so in order to be competitive or even to participate.
Casually rolled off in the Serio letter is that both positive horses were on Regumate. Somehow I’ve managed to show lots of mares and never need the stuff (and is Calvert a mare?). What kills me is that there seems to be a whole assumption all up and down the division that some sort of medication is needed for every horse in the barn.
BTW, I agree with them totally about the optics on Perfect Prep.
[QUOTE=marianne;8270984]
Didn’t I read somewhere recently that when Tori ages out from the Junior Hunters that the horses she rides will be retired to Parker’s farm?[/QUOTE]
Yes. BP told me (in a group conversation at an event at Huntland in the spring) she is only going to be having horses in the open divisions starting 2016 show year. No one else shows, or will show, the Jr hunters that TC currently does for BP. They will be retired to Huntland after indoors. I am not sure if she will also retire the Eq horses or have AD sell them.
Any Calming Supplement should be banned. Your buying it and feeding it to your horse for the purpose of altering behavior in hopes to win. You feed it in order to quiet your horse for the show ring. There is no excuse for that. I applaud USEF for finally getting more strict, enforcing the bans, and honestly letting them have it. Now they’re all crying “poor me” on social media.
[QUOTE=snaffle1987;8271334]
Any Calming Supplement should be banned. Your buying it and feeding it to your horse for the purpose of altering behavior in hopes to win. You feed it in order to quiet your horse for the show ring. There is no excuse for that. I applaud USEF for finally getting more strict, enforcing the bans, and honestly letting them have it. Now they’re all crying “poor me” on social media.[/QUOTE]
They aren’t letting them “have it”. At least not everyone. The horse can still compete and the owner isn’t penalized much beyond having to return prizes.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8270776]
Wonder if Mrs. Parker is paying for Mrs. Colvin’s legal challenge?[/QUOTE]
I wonder how this is all going to play out. Will the relationship continue? If BC is saying Not my fault, it sounds like she’s pointing fingers towards BP.
As for how this will effect the perception of TC’s riding? If you can’t see the true talent that girl has, you’re blind. People who think drugging a horse means you can get around the ring in beautiful fashion are really underestimating what it takes. TC isn’t a passsenger but she’s enough of a rider to make it almost look like she is. That is truly amazing talent.
As for the rest of the kerfuffle while I was sleeping. I’ll address a few of the comments aimed at me but will try to keep from derailing the thread.
Yes…but when was the last time you saw one? It’s d-rings and a smattering of full cheeks.
As far as the rest of your post, my guess is that you’re about as familiar with dressage scoring as caballogurl is with hunter scoring. What your post sounds like is someone who crams their horse together, riding front to back, is going to score well. Since leaving the hunters for the event world several years ago, I’ve seen nothing of the sort.
I know enough about dressage scoring to be dangerous. I’ve watched A LOT of bad dressage get decent scores. I’ve also seen some good dressage and it’s lovely, but I see a lot more bad stuff. Overflexed, tense horses. it’s not pretty
I would imagine the difference in your horses has more to do with your improved riding as you noted. I can’t imagine a tense hunter doing that well in any type of rated divisions. My TB has cute form and is a good egg, but he gets a little tense and quick (probably because I get tense. Greg Best said he would never be one to look lopey and slow) and it means he’s not an A circuit hunter.
Wringing tails and pinned ears of irritation will cost you in dressage but it’s not the same One Mistake and Out that hunters have, where a rail destroys the whole round regardless of its other merits. Instead it’s going to be 1-2 points per movement, so it will only kill you if it’s present throughout the test. I’m not saying one is better than the other, only a different philosophy of scoring.
So, one of my favorites but man, she was busy with her tail. I do love her ears, though.
[QUOTE=DMK;8270790]And we care, why?
I mean seriously, someone wants/needs the full princess program or some variation thereof, why do we care? Maybe that horse has a bit of a spook, and needs a ride down. Maybe that owner perceives the horse has a spook and needs a ride with a pro. Maybe that owner is the sole breadwinner in the family and feels like a little extra caution is justified. Maybe that horse comes with baggage. Maybe that rider comes with baggage. WHY WOULD WE CARE? Unless that person is finishing up a junior/ammie career on the full princess program and planning to hang out a shingle and setting themselves up as capable to be a trainer (and unfortunately, that DOES happen), how does it affect you, me or supershorty?
And where do you draw the line? Why should it just be shows where these shortcuts are so offensive to you? I mean just this AM, I had someone get on my horse for the first time in weeks after mucho $$$ in back treatments. Hey, I broke him, I started him, but damn, I just. did. not. want to be a lawn dart, and I really didn’t want to get hurt. I’m pretty sure I learned it’s OK to go for the catch rider and skip out on the work. And if you can’t do the work at home, aren’t you even more pathetic? <— me, signing up, first in line to receive my Pathetic badge![/QUOTE]
Thanks, DMK. I bolded the part the I struggle with the most. It’s just me bringing in the money and I’ve been seriously injured before. It becomes a very scary time. I find that I become more cautious when job is crazy.
[QUOTE=IPEsq;8270993]No, that’s not how scoring (or grading) on a curve works, except the difference in horses is that the best of the worst still gets a blue ribbon. Doesn’t mean the scores are distributed on a curve. You could have all scores in the 60s. It doesn’t mean you always need an “A” to win a class, and it also doesn’t mean that your mediocre round that happened to win that day was an “A” round. A BNT who I rode with as a junior told me on a few occasions when I was doing a hunter classic that I didn’t need an A to win that day based on how the class was going and who was there. So, he would tell me not to try to be a super star but maybe ride safe and shoot for a B, maybe even B- to try to come out on top.
There is no curve applied to horse show scoring. You could have 8/10 competitors with a rail or refusal or something and then a winner with an 85. What you’ve got is placing of the top 6 straight scores. The criteria for scoring excellent rounds and major fault rounds may tend to put the majority of rounds in a large class in the C range, which means that the actual performance of the participants in a large class may wind up taking a bell curve type shape. But to actually score on a curve means applying a scale after the fact. Your 65 winning round never ever turns into a 90 just because you got a blue ribbon.[/QUOTE]
First…I was NOT the one that says hunter scoring is graded on a curve. That was findeight.
I indicated that each horse has a “best” score and it’s not the same for every horse. Your scored against your other competitors, with a few standard type deductions, but just because you were the best in the class you don’t get an 85.
So no one gets concerned (and thanks to those who read my posts for what they were instead of being reactionary:
I am an average rider at best. A typical lower level ammie that is currently lucky to ride 3 or four times a week. I am, however, an ammie that studies the sport.
I sometimes ride through crap and sometimes I don’t. It really depends on what I think is best for my horse. If I’m having a crappy day and missing every distance, etc…I just might have my trainer to get on to school ms. mare so she doesn’t lose trust in the ride. She’s kind, but there is only so much she can take. I have no shame about having my trainer get on my rehabbing gelding when he was naughty. She rides better than I do, it’s why I pay her.
I do not drug my horses (except Mr. Rehab when necessary), I’m kind of a teetotaler myself and I do not condone the use of drugs for horse sports. There are therapuetic applications that I’m fine with, but quieting your horse for the ring isn’t a use that sits right wtih me…even the use of Perfect Prep.
Lastly, I heart Inclusive and I’m sad to see this whole thing. I also hope Tommy is being honest. I hate seeing this issue with one of the top horses and riders…and I like to think there are some pros that really deserve to be suspended/fined a lot more than TS.
Yes, I said it was on a curve, because that’s the best way to try to explain they are ranked in comparison to others in that class that day.
Thats the way it was explained to me back when I started Hunters and was in a state of puzzlement over how they are judged. That made the most sense to me then and still does. The people who explained it that way are/were popular R judges who work a lot so I am not the only one who likes that concept to try to demystify judging Hunters as far as figuring out who places where and why. Also heard it used at a couple of “how the judge sees it” clinics for exhibitors at big shows.
It’s eye opening going to a lot of these horse shows and see what people do to the horses. I think a lot of time, it might would be easier to allow something rather than see what happens behind closed doors.
I was at a very big horse show in my area, and a BNt trainer who is very respected, was stabled behind us. I was in and out of my stall and the tack stall and noticed about 3 horses were missing their water buckets. All of the other horses had water. Flash-forward 2 hours later, horses have been lunged, come back - still no water. Keep in mind it’s the middle of the summer in the south, think 90’s before heat index. Told my trainer, the trainer told the steward, and nothing was done. I felt so bad for those poor horses. All for a blue ribbon.
You also hear about other crazy stuff and witness it too. It’s really sad. And in my example, it comes from people you really don’t expect it from.
That’s an old QH trick. They draw blood too or hang their heads high for hours in an attempt to keep them looking like moving taxidermy. So, yes, there are worse things out there that can be done instead of calming drugs.
Fortunately most just scratch when the testers show up- and they know the minute they pull into the parking lot. Cheaper then a fine and they have enough remaining ethics not to brutalize the horse trying to calm it without drugs. God forbid they tell the owner the truth it’s not a suitable mount or needs more training time and lose a client to somebody else with no qualms about doing whatever it takes.
Really a vicious circle and not so simple to those on that spinning wheel like rats for a living. Stopping that wheel is complicated but it has to happen.
[QUOTE=IPEsq;8269798]
I take back my 3 horses comment. I thought from the letter there was a 3rd Serio horse not on the sanctions list, but it turns out I just couldn’t follow the timeline the way it was written.[/QUOTE]
In Serio’s letter, she mentioned a horse who had tested positive many years ago. I think that is the third horse.
[QUOTE=MintHillFarm;8270526]
And with the timing of 9/1 as the start of the suspension for Bridget, she will not be able to go to Tori’s last finals…Frankly, if the hearing date for all and suspensions are for the same substance, they should all be for the same terms; start date, fine etc.[/QUOTE]
The suspension period is usually set with regards to the timing of the infraction. If you err in June, you repent in June.
[QUOTE=Midge;8271398]
The suspension period is usually set with regards to the timing of the infraction. If you err in June, you repent in June.[/QUOTE]
Yeah so why, in this case, are there two months difference between the start and end dates for two people signing as trainers on the same entry blank for the same horse at the same show?
Still haven’t thought of or read anything with an answer for that one,
